Retrieve a page's content blocks in their original order by supplying the entity ID, returning text (Markdown) and image blocks as structured output.
Get the ordered content blocks of a page entity. Returns text (Markdown) and image blocks in position order.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| entityId | Yes | Entity ID (dashless hex) of the page to fetch content blocks for |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.8.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already declares the operation is read-only. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the result is ordered, includes text rendered as Markdown, and includes image blocks. This helps the agent understand what to expect without an output schema, though it does not address edge cases like empty pages or invalid entity IDs.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two concise sentences with no filler. The core action and resource are front-loaded, and the return composition is stated efficiently. Every sentence contributes useful information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-parameter read-only getter with a 100%-covered schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains what is returned and the ordering. Without an output schema, a bit more detail about the exact block structure or empty behavior could help, but the core calling context is sufficiently covered.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%: the single entityId parameter is described as 'Entity ID (dashless hex) of the page to fetch content blocks for.' The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get the ordered content blocks of a page entity.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_entity by focusing on content blocks rather than general entity data, and it specifies the return shape (text Markdown and image blocks in position order).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for retrieving page content blocks, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over a sibling like get_entity or list_entities. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided, so the agent must infer usage from the resource name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.